Unrelated.
Just, not related by any mean.
You don’t have the data. only CCP has the data, and only them can consider whether or not removing the wardecs was a success.
You don’t have the way to get the data. Anything you claim about that data, is just you talking off your bummer.
Claiming you have a data that you can’t have, is a plain lie.
This can easily be accomplished with the following steps:
{citation needed}
It seems, at the very least, to not be an opinion shared by the devs - unless you have more data than I have, which is totally possible.
Why do you keep posting this? It seems a little obsessive, yah? People are allowed to discuss things without linking every statement to a peer-reviewed journal article.
That’s simply reality. That’s how the most “successful” games operate these days. If you want players and profit, you sell Candy Crush and MapleStory, with carrot-and-stick monetization out the ass to play on the populace’s low collective intelligence.
The question is whether or not we should allow EVE to exist as EVE at the expense of having low retention, or if sacrificing the game’s original principles is a worthwhile trade-off for attempting to turn the game into a clone of the most successful games on the market.
Indeed, if CCP wants more retention, they definitely should remove all aspects of nonconsensual PvP from EVE. I would also go as far as to say than players like Aiko and I need to be given instant, permanent bans from the game, with no chance to appeal, and our names displayed publicly on the main website’s splash page in order to show CCP’s new tough stance “against griefing.”
Whether or not this increase in player retention would mean anything when the game inevitable implodes on itself is a different matter.
That’s not a proof that this would actually work.
You are making a false choice fallacy here.
Anderson is an empirically-driven person, which is fine, but it ignores the fact that there’s more than one way to skin a cat, so to say. The provision of first-hand experience accounts is often just as, if not more important in research than hard data.
Think of it this way: who would you trust more when performing an investigation, someone who’s read a bunch of flight manuals and has access huge chunks of crash-landing statistics, or a veteran pilot who’s been flying planes for 40 years?
You can’t just discount the latter because their perspective isn’t empirical or academic in nature. And with regard to EVE, many of us are arguing according to our deep understanding of and experience with the game, which is the best we can do in the absence of hard data. These arguments can’t merely be thrown away, and data can lie even more than people do, anyway.
That’s a polite way to state this.
I am generally polite when I can see that a person isn’t being intentionally hostile.
Your experiences are just fine, as a collection of anecdotal experiences.
It does not mean that you are actually able to have a correct view of the bigger situation, than what you are actually exposed to. And especially since you have already set your mind, it means that you are not able to recognize when you are wrong.
Experience is good when you have to deal with a common situation. Experience is however useless when you have to change the situation.
Being adapted to your environment does not mean that your opinion of how to change the environment is on point. It’s asking people who benefit on a situation, how they want to change it : it’s a nonsense. They will try as they can to keep the statu quo, even if it’s the root of the issues.
It doesn’t mean she isn’t able to have a correct view, and it doesn’t mean that you do have a correct view. Your obsession with ‘data’ is irrational. Intuition, experience, and common sense are equally and perhaps even more valid means of asserting knowledge.
Keep in mind the nature of my experience: I have conducted thousands of wars, and I’ve infiltrated many of my targets with spies/alts, so I know exactly what happens internally in organizations at the receiving end of EVE wars. As an extension of that, I’ve seen how other war groups (not just my own) act, both because I have been a part of many of them, and because the corporations I’ve infiltrated also received wars from others.
I can confidently say that new players were much more receptive to wars, and were more willing to fight, on average, than the older players. But when the older players provided improper guidance (e.g. “log off and play something else until the griefers go away” or “leave the corporation so that you don’t have to stop mining until this is over”), the new players stagnated, and had much lower retention rates.
Caveat: the wars I’m speaking about were “goal-oriented”, and not the “blanket wars” that primarily exist today. They were very interactive, personal conflicts. Getting shot by some HD campers on the Jita undock isn’t the same thing as what I’m talking about; it’s cancer for EVE.
I can confirm this is true. The citation is myself and Destiny_Corrupted.
We are subject matter experts.
neutral orcas mining your moons again ?
james is rolling in his grave …
Wardec change happened mid December 2018. And there’s a pretty clear downward trend afterwards.
I know we’ve had this discussion before and you don’t think log in data is related to retention. But since no one else is that obtuse, i’m still going to keep saying it.
It’s not that I don’t. It’s just, it’s not.
You are making something be different from what it actually is.
Your claim that the retention is even worse is NOT backed by any FACT. You are just making assumptions, which you claim as facts.
The thing is, arbitrary interpretations are not facts.
You have NO evidence for your claim. Therefore, they are BS.
Ho, and go ■■■■ yourself with your insults.
Quality players, the kind that CCP wants to retain, are attracted to PvP without safety nets and gutter bumpers. I don’t need to cite this, I know it. It’s a fact. Carebears are bad for this game, and they are also bad at this game.
I do agree with Anderson that we can’t say that war changes were directly responsible for the diminishing player count. We simply can’t jump to that conclusion without having hard data, in this case.
But I also believe in what I said previously, when I said that players who quit due to hardship aren’t likely to discriminate against the type of hardship. CCP has implemented quite a few changes recently that made the game more difficult for everyone. It’s reasonable to believe that EVE is losing its “dead weight”. As a certain someone would say, “good riddance.” Those people will be handily replaced when old players find out that EVE is returning to its roots, and come back to the game, just like I did.
But we have had this discussion before, and you said you didn’t think there was any relationship between players logging in and player retention. You are the only person that sees the logic of your position and you use circular reasoning like you just did:
‘it isn’t because it isn’t’
True obtuse is an insult. But not an inaccurate one.
I thought it was a sandbox? so is there only one right way to play now?